Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 08-7157
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
Judge. (2:08-cv-00054-JBF-JEB)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Jimmy Ray Weatherholt, Jr., a Virginia prisoner at the
Greensville
Correctional
Center,
appeals
the
district
courts
both instances, we vacate the orders and remand the case for
further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
for Defense v. Trimble Navigation Ltd., 484 F.3d 700, 705 (4th
Cir. 2007).
Bell
Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. ___, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965, 1974
(2007).
judge
must
accept
as
true
all
2
of
the
factual
allegations
contained
in
the
complaint.
(citations omitted).
Erickson,
127
S.
Ct.
at
2200
Eighth
Amendment
imposes
duty
on
prison
(citation omitted).
Id.
To be deliberately indifferent, a
Id. at 837.
substantial
demonstration
in
risk
the
is
usual
question
ways,
of
fact
including
subject
inference
to
from
that
the
risk
was
obvious.
Id.
at
842.
While
the
may show that the obvious escaped him, . . . he would not escape
liability
if
the
evidence
showed
that
he
merely
refused
to
declined
to
confirm
suspected to exist.
inferences
of
risk
that
he
strongly
safety,
he
did
not
know
that
the
complainant
was
Id. at 843.
A plaintiffs
Id. at 848-49.
mere
as
negligence
does
not
qualify
deliberate
A showing of
indifference.
show
mental
he
injury
suffered
as
serious
result
of
or
significant
the
physical
defendants
or
conduct.
Although Weatherholt
does not explicitly allege that Harvey knew of, and disregarded,
4
to
an
administrative
grievance
that
he
filed
with
The resolution of
Harvey
acted
with
deliberate
indifference,
but
it
general
risk
procedure
identifications
in
in
to
inmate
ordering
person.
The
safety
by
failing
Weatherholt
attachment
to
of
to
follow
make
the
his
grievance
Accordingly, we vacate
In order to withstand a
evidence
sufficient
to
reveal
the
existence
of
to
the
administrative
finding
that
proper
procedures
the
theft
from
him
by
looking
at
photos.
While
it
is
the
rationale
for
the
prison
policy
in
question.
out
of
recognition
that
in-person
identification
of
she
before
was
not
taking
aware
him
to
of
any
risk
identify
the
to
Weatherholts
perpetrators
he
safety
alleged
forcibly entered his cell, held him against his will, and robbed
him of his belongings.
of
any
risk
of
harm
to
Weatherholt
from
an
in-person
Given
Weatherholt
factfinder
obvious
described,
to
risk
reasonable
the
the
rationally
of
violent
present
conclude
significant
prison
nature
official
harm
would
record
that
to
of
the
could
Bradley
Weatherholt
have
been
incident
permit
ignored
of
which
aware.
a
an
a
Summary
and
remand
for
further
proceedings.
While
we
to
dispense
leave
the
with
the
question
of
sound
discretion
oral
argument
of
appointment
the
because
of
district
the
facts
counsel
court.
and
on
We
legal
See Weatherholt v.
Harvey, No. 2:08-cv-54, slip op. at 4-5 (E.D. Va. April 11,
2008); Weatherholt v. Bradley, No. 2:08-cv-54, slip op. at 8-9
(E.D. Va. June 20, 2008).